Outside of the soundtrack and perhaps the number of party members, none of the things I listed are subjective in any way. How many people actually enjoy a linear RPG with a terrible story and non-existent player agency? How many people are partial to demeaning, misogynistic ass-shots, terrible Leona Lewis ballads and mountains upon mountains of kitsch? If Square wants Final Fantasy to succeed as the massive blockbuster of an experience that it is, they need to take a page from developers like Bioware and Bethesda. I'm not asking them to abandon turn based combat or the unique Final Fantasy aesthetic. I just want a game that does something other than pander to the established fanbase.

Outside of the soundtrack and perhaps the number of party members, none of the things I listed are subjective in any way.

Bullshit. There is something of a scale on how subjective or objective certain aspects of creative works are, but if we're going purely objective then only areas like performance and how buggy a game is are unwavering, and even then it can be subjective on how tolerable they are as the Walking Dead GOTY awards show despite the ridiculous save issues plaguing multiple platforms. Certainly I'd be citing stuff like good balance, user friendliness within reason, and responsive controls come WAY further ahead in objective versus subjective than "too linear", "terrible story", and "not enough choices". Not that I don't think at least the first two AREN'T a problem, but let's not act as if it's an objective fact those are bad points (I'm not sure how prevalent some of those issues really are anyway). Unless you're talking purely on what will get the most sales, but that's a very different can of worms and not usually where we bring up the objective/subjective argument I'd think, at the very least though I don't think being very linear is inherently stifling sales, ME seems to do OK and they clamped down more on that after the first game.

Bullshit. There is something of a scale on how subjective or objective certain aspects of creative works are, but if we're going purely objective then only areas like performance and how buggy a game is are unwavering, and even then it can be subjective on how tolerable they are as the Walking Dead GOTY awards show despite the ridiculous save issues plaguing multiple platforms. Certainly I'd be citing stuff like good balance, user friendliness within reason, and responsive controls come WAY further ahead in objective versus subjective than "too linear", "terrible story", and "not enough choices". Not that I don't think at least the first two AREN'T a problem, but let's not act as if it's an objective fact those are bad points (I'm not sure how prevalent some of those issues really are anyway). Unless you're talking purely on what will get the most sales, but that's a very different can of worms and not usually where we bring up the objective/subjective argument I'd think, at the very least though I don't think being very linear is inherently stifling sales, ME seems to do OK and they clamped down more on that after the first game.

The things I listed ~

- a story ostracized of Final Fantasy's characteristic melodrama- dialogue choices (which, I should add, Square already used in Final Fantasy XIII-2)- environments similar to those found in the PS1 entries (again, which you can find in XIII-2)- character-centric side quests

By the semantic definition of "subjective", could someone theoretically debate the merits of these aspects? Sure. From a grounded and realistic standpoint, not really. Removing sappy dialogue and retroactive continuity should not have game-breaking consequences, and seeing as how Square showed some inherent potential for dialogue options and environments that weren't just corridors with XIII-2, then by my logic they're perfectly capable of reproducing those elements in their next entry to the franchise. The fact that the Walking Dead climbed its way to game of the year and Final Fantasy XIII was met mainly with disappointment should speak volumes about what the majority of players are more interested in (as in, glitch-ridden yet engaging, and not a cinematic 60-hour polished turd of a wonky science fiction soap opera).

Quote

So include camel toe with those ass shots? Uhh, OK.

(Seriously, WTF was that doing on a robot?)

What part of "take a page" are you confused about? I'm well aware of Bioware's unseemly portrayals of females in their works.

EDIT: Anyway I'm beginning to sound like a pedantic prick at this point so I'll just quit while I'm ahead. I never meant to say WRPGs were superior to JRPGs or any such nonsense, so sorry if it came across that way.

ive long thought square should split FF into 2 sub series. one for the FF1-6/9 type stuff and one for psuedo sci fi stuff. problem is i think SE used to have 2 FF dev teams. one now handle's the online FF's and if memory serves tri ace developed XIII-2.

Logged

“Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from.”

- a story ostracized of Final Fantasy's characteristic melodrama- dialogue choices (which, I should add, Square already used in Final Fantasy XIII-2)- environments similar to those found in the PS1 entries (again, which you can find in XIII-2)- character-centric side quests

By the semantic definition of "subjective", could someone theoretically debate the merits of these aspects? Sure. From a grounded and realistic standpoint, not really. Removing sappy dialogue and retroactive continuity should not have game-breaking consequences, and seeing as how Square showed some inherent potential for dialogue options and environments that weren't just corridors with XIII-2, then by my logic they're perfectly capable of reproducing those elements in their next entry to the franchise. The fact that the Walking Dead climbed its way to game of the year and Final Fantasy XIII was met mainly with disappointment should speak volumes about what the majority of players are more interested in (as in, glitch-ridden yet engaging, and not a cinematic 60-hour polished turd of a wonky science fiction soap opera).

It IS being somewhat pedantic on my part to fixate on that "not subjective" bit, but they are for the most part aspects that are absolutely about personal preference, and in certain circles (IE Japan's user base perhaps) are not flaws at all. They may not be what WE want, but that's different from being an objective failing.

For the record: melodrama within reason IS part of FF's charm, FFVI is very much a melodramatic story yet that's one of the most revered entries (although I need to replay that, as IV is also excessively melodramatic and that fell flat on its face painfully upon replaying) and if anything I'd say the bigger failure is how incoherent and inane some of the stories have become, FFXIII was pretty bad there and FFXIII-2 and seemingly Lightning Returns REALLY go off the deep end. Dialogue choices I think are likely to be superfluous in FF as XIII-2 actually did demonstrate, I don't see SE actually going with significant story branching nor do I imagine they want to even consider milder story ramifications much like Walking Dead does. And the other two points, well, those are what I meant about things I'd want to see done that the series had done in the past.

Quote

What part of "take a page" are you confused about? I'm well aware of Bioware's unseemly portrayals of females in their works.

It was partially a joke, though it did seem odd to bring up the angle of misogyny via unnecessary fan service when in their own way Bioware may've actually been worse. It seems more a problem with general game development if not the media period, and honestly is preferable to what Nintendo seems to like doing, slavishly sticking with the "save the princess" plot.

Quote

EDIT: Anyway I'm beginning to sound like a pedantic prick at this point so I'll just quit while I'm ahead. I never meant to say WRPGs were superior to JRPGs or any such nonsense, so sorry if it came across that way.

Understood, and like said honestly the subjective/objective bit set me off more. Otherwise I'd just be half agreeing with your points: there's clearly SOMETHING wrong with the way FF's been handling story and the games could stand to return to that linear-leaning middle ground rather than just being a hall from beginning to end that has a ball room close to the end. You just can't underestimate what people WANT out of these games, as arguments over what Zelda should be can readily show.

To be fair to FFVI, FFIV's melodrama loses a lot of its kick when you know that everybody's just going to get better anyway (aside from Tellah who was an old man who got progressively worse as you leveled him and had a terrible gimmick ability).

To be fair to FFVI, FFIV's melodrama loses a lot of its kick when you know that everybody's just going to get better anyway (aside from Tellah who was an old man who got progressively worse as you leveled him and had a terrible gimmick ability).

Oh man, I can't recall... did he actually lose stats?

ANd yeah, the melodrama is pretty thick in those games. I think the lack of dialogue may actually be a plus on its end.

To be fair to FFVI, FFIV's melodrama loses a lot of its kick when you know that everybody's just going to get better anyway (aside from Tellah who was an old man who got progressively worse as you leveled him and had a terrible gimmick ability).

Oh man, I can't recall... did he actually lose stats?

ANd yeah, the melodrama is pretty thick in those games. I think the lack of dialogue may actually be a plus on its end.

Shame it took three games to get that bit out.... though it'll probably be coming back when/if Versus comes out.

And a shame we only get "the Ghost of Etro" in 13-2....good grief.

Yeah, he and Cecil both end up losing stats as the game progresses (although Cecil only loses them through his later Dark Swords and it stops being an issues when he job changes).

And I don't mind some thorough world building every now and again so long as its used for more than "Oh, and by the way, everything broke again." or "Here, have another random (robo)god who wants to commit assisted suicide for some vaguely explained reason.".